Delhi HC Grants Kejriwal, Other AAP Leaders & Saurav Das 4 Weeks To Reply In Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma Contempt Case

Delhi High Court hearing the suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against Arvind Kejriwal and other AAP leaders over alleged social media posts targeting Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.
X

Delhi High Court granted four weeks to Arvind Kejriwal and other respondents to file replies in the suo motu criminal contempt case over an alleged social media campaign targeting Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma

The Delhi High Court granted four weeks to Arvind Kejriwal and other respondents to file their replies, ordered fresh service of notice on one respondent, and listed the criminal contempt matter for hearing on September 21

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday granted four weeks to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia and other respondents to file their replies in the suo motu criminal contempt proceedings initiated over an alleged scandalous social media campaign targeting Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.

The Division Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja took up the matter and first ascertained the appearance of the parties.

"Who all are appearing? Let's see who all are represented," the Bench remarked at the outset.

Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhari appeared for former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. Advocate Vivek Jain represented former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, Advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai appeared for Saurav Das, while Advocate Lokesh Bhardwaj represented Saurabh Bhardwaj.

The Court noted that Respondent No. 5 had not yet been served with notice.

"It appears that Respondent No. 5 is not served. Let fresh notices be served on R5, by SHO concerned. In case, he is not available, SHO will inquire about his current address and serve him," the Bench directed.

During the hearing, Advocate Ashok Chaitanya appearing in person, who initiated the criminal contempt proceedings against Arvind Kejriwal, Saurav Das, Gopal Rai and Saurabh Bhardwaj informed the Delhi High Court that the allegedly contemptuous social media posts had since been removed.

Chaitanya submitted that although the posts appeared to have been deleted, he had preserved the electronic record.
"They appear to have deleted the material which I have placed reliance on. But I recorded it. That is available with me. I may be allowed to place the electronic record," he told the Court.
Taking note of the submission, the Bench permitted Chaitanya to place the electronic record on record.

The Court granted all respondents four weeks to file their replies with an advance copy to the Amicus Curiae and posted the matter for further hearing on September 21.

The suo motu criminal contempt proceedings concern an alleged social media campaign against Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. Apart from Kejriwal and Sisodia, the proceedings also involve AAP leaders Sanjay Singh, Durgesh Pathak, Vinay Mishra, Saurabh Bhardwaj, Gopal Rai and Saurav Das.

Background of the Case

Notably, in May the High Court had appointed Senior Advocate Rajdipa Behura as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court in the contempt petition. On the same day, the Court had also issued notice to AAP leader Gopal Rai and journalist Saurav Das in the contempt petition.

Earlier, on May 19, the Court had issued notice to AAP leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh, Durgesh Pathak, Vinay Mishra, and Saurabh Bhardwaj alleged contemnors in the suo motu criminal contempt proceedings initiated over a purported social media campaign targeting Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.

The case stems from a judgment dated 14 May 2026 passed by a Single Judge in CRL.REV.P. 134/2026 titled Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Kuldeep Singh and Ors., where reliance was placed on social media posts and other electronic and publication records.

The proceedings stem from alleged “defamatory and vilifying” remarks made against Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, who was hearing the CBI’s challenge to the discharge of Kejriwal and other accused in the excise policy case. Justice Sharma took note of the allegations and initiated contempt proceedings against the AAP leaders. Following this, she also directed that the excise policy case be transferred to another Bench, given that Kejriwal and Sisodia are accused in the matter.

The controversy arose after Kejriwal, Sisodia and Durgesh Pathak sought Justice Sharma’s recusal from the case. The judge, however, rejected the application on April 20, observing that a litigant cannot be permitted to undermine judicial authority or “sow seeds of mistrust” against the institution.

Subsequently, social media posts targeting the judge surfaced, prompting the initiation of contempt proceedings. Justice Sharma also took note of letters written by Kejriwal, Sisodia and Pathak indicating a boycott of proceedings, as well as a video released by Kejriwal explaining the reasons for the boycott.

It is to be noted that the Central Bureau of Investigation’s petition challenging the discharge of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief Arvind Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and other accused in the corruption case linked to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam will also be heard by Justice Manoj Jain on May 19.

Case Title: Court on its own motion v. Arvind Kejriwal and Ors.

Bench: Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja

Hearing Date: August 4, 2026

Tags

Next Story